paulraphael

wait ... are you implying that if the extra cost went into subsidizing a worker's wine siesta, it wouldn't be worth it?!? i really don't know the answer to your question. the only enameled cast iron i'm familiar with is creuset, staub (more expensive), and desco (inherited from grandma).

This is a first draft: corn chowder with morels poached and roasted amish farm turkey french farm-style stuffing with apples duck demiglace-based brown sauce cranberry grand marnier sauce peter reinhart's outrageously great corn bread celeriac puree with garlic and fennel blackened brussel sprouts w/truffle butter pumpkin tart w/ vanilla cognac ice cream chocolate marquise w/ pear and clove sauce i feel like there should be some kind of finger food type hors d'oeuvre. i don't know much about these things ... if anyone has ideas, i'm all ears.

Anyone have the new edition? The 2nd edition is probably favorite cookbook of all time. I only glanced at the new one long enough to see the list of things he chose not to do: expand the asian section, add a section on newer "molecular" techniques, etc.. That seems strange. It's what's been going on since the last edition. Has anyone spent time with the new book?

Is there anything special about those cookies that you want to replicate (besides thin and crisp)? In general, thin and crisp cookies are the easiest to make ... people trying to make other kinds often end up with them by accident. Any recipe that uses 100% butter (preferably lots of it) and that's formed into balls and baked when the dough is warm should give you thin and crisp cookie. Other things to look for or to tweak: -not a lot of leavening, or maybe even none -made with melted butter instead of creamed butter / sugar -if made with creamed butter/sugar, go ahead and overcream it (until it acutally feels smooth to the touch) -try a slightly lower oven temperature / longer baking time (325) -use a high quality, low moisture butter (will make the cookies especially delicious, too)

Clay pots can't be used on the stove. Enameled cast iron is different from plain cast iron; it has a non-reactive enamel coating on all surfaces. This makes it useful for braising. It also makes it one of the few kinds of cookware that can be used to store food, without leaching anything nasty into it. You can make a soup or stew in an enamelled pan and it go back and forth from the stove to the fridge. They're definitely expensive. I got mine a few years ago from a Canadian seller who had them for less than half what they go for now. If I were in the market now I'd be looking on ebay. The dollar tanking probably has something to do with it. But they've always been expensive. My understanding is that they're made by a fairly primitive, labor intensive process that was developed back when labor was a lot cheaper. The good news is that there is no need for a whole set of enamelled cast iron. It's a great material for dutch ovens and oval ovens and similar braising vessels. You don't need an enamelled iron skillet, you certainly don't need an enamelled iron stock pot, and enamelled iron saucepans are completely useless. So if you can find a piece or two on ebay in the sizes you like, you're set for life. Just don't drop them.

Fruit ice creams are the most challenging to make, because every fruit has different levels of moisture and sugar (which are both structural ingredients in the ice cream). There can be other issues, too ... different levels of acidity, and other odd chemicals in specific fruits can react with certain stabilizing ingredients. I've been forced to treat each fruit ice cream as an individual project. The amount of sugar, added milk solids, and stabilizing ingredients will be different for each, at least if you're picky about texture. And of course, it will be hard to make the the ice cream at all consistent from batch to batch, because the fruit never will be. If you're hardcore, you can get some kind of hygrometer to measure the specific gravity of your puree ... then you'll be able to calculate the amount of sugar and get a head start on tweaking the other ingredients. I've always just winged it.

What about chefs who create completely new principles of cooking--ones that change the way a whole generation thinks about food? Is there potential for these (very few) people to distinguish themselves as geniuses? And if not, why are they different from people in other pursuits who get accepted as geniuses for similarly revolutionary accomplishments?

Off the top of my head, the only issue I can think of with magnetized knives is that when you sharpen, steel dust could stick to the blades and be very hard to get off (especially without scratching up the finish). It should be possible for the mag block guys to make ones that don't magnetize knives. Forschner makes cool edge guards that clamp over the blade with magnets. They claim that because their magnets alternate polarity at close intervals, they won't magnetize the blades. Assuming this isn't bogus marketing, the blocks could be made to work the same way.

I want to add a plug for Jeffrey's on Essex, at the Essex St. Market. I heard about them, and even though I've been more than happy with Florence and Ottomanelli and Sons, I went to check them out. Jeffrey himself greeted me, and when he heard the kinds of question I had, he tossed me an apron and invited me back to check out the meat aging in the walk-in. He has a huge assortment of meats, including black plume and black foot chickens, Berkshire pork, lamb from Colorado, Australia, and New Zealand, prime dry aged beef (aged in house and to order from an aging facility) and lots of offal and exotic meats. He made it clear that he was MY butcher and would get or do whatever I asked. I saw some 8-week dry aged strip steak in the case, and commented that I'd never had meat that was aged that long. He said, "well let's have some." He cut a steak, let me season it, and walked it over to the George Foreman grill at the fish monger's stand next door. we took it back and at it together. What kind of butcher does this?? I asked him if he'd accept free labor in exchange for some butchering education. He just said, "grab a knife!" So I've now spent two days following him around and cutting meat. The cool thing is that he'll really do whatever you want. Right now he has a small rack of rib steaks being custom aged for a customer. He doesn't charge for this (but you'll pay for all meat that has to be trimmed off, which will increase with aging time). I love the idea that if I plan a steak dinner for friends, I could conceivable have him age the meat for ten weeks, and my final price would still be no more than what I'm used to paying. So far he doesn't do "artisinal meats." Meaning, he doesn't deal directly with farms and get seasonal grass fed, organic this and that. He doesn't have a big enough market for it yet, but that could change if he gets enough requests. So, if you have some high end requests, give him a call or stop by. He really wants to be your butcher, and if he sees the market getting big enough, he'll be able to get in the kinds of products that could give lobel's a run for their money. He says he selects all the meat personally. The wholesalers don't pick it for him; he goes down and gets the best looking selections he can find. He doesn't focus on selling wholesale, but prides himself on helping restaurants in emergencies. His wholesale card says, in big letters, "Who Fucked Up The Order". A great guy selling great meat. And they've been in business as a family for four generations, since the late 1800s. 212-457-6521

So technically speaking, what's the difference between blowing one's head off and blowing one's brains out? sorry.

I realized that in my first post didn't address the original question at all. By slow, I thought you meant low heat, but you clearly said you meant not a lot of motion. Honestly, I think people still call this sauté. It's not the classical definition, but it's essentially the same cooking process. We talk about sautéed steaks and chicken cutlets; the cooking is still done by high heat in just enough oil to fill the gaps between the food and the pan. But large pieces that essentially have two sides are more sensibly cooked by turning than tossing. I think you're getting into subtleties of approach ... like when it's better to toss often vs. letting something brown for a stretch and then tossing. I think it's fundamentally still sauté.

Marie Sharp's habanero pepper sauce is my runaway fave. This sauce used to be Melinda's (the U.S. distributor screwed Marie out of the name, so now Melinda's is a more generic, industrial recipe). It may be blasphemy, but I'm not a fan of Tabasco. It just tastes like hot vinegar to me.

I don't know where you get this idea. Deep frying is not boiling in oil (the oil is not boiling), nor is it some new deviation. It's a classical technique (friture). "Pan frying" is a useful term because it distinguishes shallow frying (done in a pan, with the food only partially immersed in oil), from deep frying, and from sauté (where only enough oil is used to coat the pan to provide better heat transfer along the surface). Of these, pan fying in a moderate amound of oil seems like the modern deviation (at least looking at the continental tradition). I don't see any reference to it either in larousse or escoffier. In both these sources, frying is synonymous with deep frying.

Cool, Daniel, looks delicious. I suspect the brining might have been unnecessary (and might have contributed to the uneven browning on the breast). It would be an interesting side by side comparison. Anyone making two turkeys on thxgiving?

This is what I would have assumed, but the bulk of fish sold for raw consumption is cryogenically flash frozen. It's required by law for all but one or two species of fish, in order to kill parasites ... but it's done fast enough that cellular damage is minimal, and the texture of the fish doesn't suffer. I've read that some sushi chefs actually prefer flash frozen fish, because in many cases the texture penalty is minimal if it's there at all, and the improvement to freshness is noticeable. I'd think these freezing conditions would be the exact ones that encourage parasites to survive, but apparently that's not the case.

This usage seems like it's so standardized now on both sides of the atlantic, that I wouldn't bother trying to fight it. Once upon a time, your definition was basically right. Sauté means "jump." It's the reason we have slope-sided pans (which are no longer even called sauté pans, but fry pans or poêls). And what we call sauté pans are large, straight sided, and better suited for frying, pan frying (what we now call sauté much of the time), braising, and frickasees. Getting back to FG's original question, "sweat" is usually applied only to vegetables, but it generally means to cook in a little oil on low heat (with the intent to cook/wilt without browning).

This scene played out between two glove-wearing, prison-tatooed cooks at my old company cafeteria: Cook 1: drops burger on the floor, picks it up, tosses it to Cook 2 Cook 2: receives pass, sends it into trash with a perfect hook shot. Then, with same pair of gloves, goes back to making my sandwich.

You could be right. It was a science fair experiment from a long time ago. After "thawing," the fish lived about two minutes (during which he seemed completely drunk). I've been doing some searches on cryonics, and most suggest that goldfish can't, in fact survive freezing. But according to many sources, including this one, some fish and small animals can: "Viruses, bacteria, sperm/eggs, embryos at early stages of development, insects, and even small animals (small frogs, some fish) can be cryogenically frozen, preserved for an indefinite time (as long as low temperature is maintained) and then thawed and returned to a living state. Large animals or organs (a few centimeters and larger) can not be safely frozen because removing heat via thick tissue by natural thermoconductivity becomes so slow that ice microcrystals grow big enough to damage cell membranes." At any rate, the issue seems like a complicated one. There are different mechanisms at work causing cell damage, not just in the freezing process, but in the storing and also the thawing process. And these processes seem to be dependent on many variables. It's still seems curious that freezing reliably kills parasites, but not some larger organisms like insects and embryos.

I probably seem paranoid, but it's just that I'm taking a food safety certification course and some of it is counterintuitive. The Man says: "May ready-to-eat foods be touched with bare hands if the hands are washed or a germicidal soap or hand sanitizer is used? No. Although hand washing is effective in reducing contamination, many people forget to wash their hands or even fail to wash them properly. Germicidal soaps and hand sanitizers have not been proven effective in destroying viruses." Is this just extreme caution in the low end food service industry? Does Thomas Keller actually wear gloves when he slices and plates meat for service? Gloves always make me suspicious. I see the way people behind counters use them (as if they're magically, permanently sterilized). I suspect people are actually more vigilant about sanitation when they don't have surgical gloves on. Meanwhile, my sense is that doctors and nurses wear gloves primarily to protect themselves. They protect the patients by washing their hands all the time. Thoughts?

Well, the point isn't stopping time; it's stopping the mobility of water. Biological processes can't take place if water can't move. The temperature at which water is completely immobilized depends on what's disolved in it; in general by the time something is at -20F you can assume that all biological activity is stopped. Not just slowed. Physical processes, like dehydration (freezerburn), and chemical processes, like oxidation (rancidification) can continue. I still don't understand why a specific amount of freezer time kills parasites.

From New York Health Dept: "The most common fish parasite is the anisakis round worm that causes the illness anisakiasis. Fish eaten raw, marinated or partially cooked can be made safe by being frozen in one of two way (1) Frozen and stored in a freezer at -4°F or lower for 7 days or secondly, frozen at -31°F or below until solid and stored at that temperature for 15 hours." How does this work? Especially the flash freezing that's used on sashimi-grade fish ... why wouldn't the minute size of the ice crystals that preserve the cell structure of the fish also preserve the cell structure of the creepy crawlies? I remember a kid at science fair flash freezing a goldfish and bringing it back to life. Thoughts?

I haven't used the Masterchef pans. My side by side comparisons involve a clad stainless all clad fry pan, and similar pans by calphalon (heavy, straight gauge aluminum), various heavy aluminum disk bottom pans, various 2.5mm copper pans clad with stainless, and cast iron skillets The all clad pan responds the fastest of the bunch, with the heavy copper close behind. The different flavors of heavy aluminum are far behind those, and the heavy cast iron is in last place. The all clad also seems to have the lowest thermal mass, so I have to be careful to get it screaming hot before searing any protein. I assume the all clad pan also has the least even heat distribution, but in the 10" fry pan it's more than adequate ... I've never had an issue with hot spots. All in all I love the performance of the clad 10" pan. For a larger saute pan I'm not sure this construction would be as good a choice. The question in my mind about the masterchef is how thick the aluminum is ... will the performance be closer to the clad all clad pan or the heavy (5mm+) calphalon pan?

I think around 2% are graded prime ... is that what you mean? Part of what's tough is that so much goes into the quality of meat, which makes it difficult to do a direct comparison. For example, that Montana ranch that you linked claims to wet age its beef, which is an inferior process to dry aging. If you don't like the meat, how much of the trouble is the feed and how much is the aging (or something else)? I'm tempted to go someplace like Lobel's that sells premium quality of both types and see how they are side by side. An expensive experiment!

I know this topic has come up before in different guises. From what I've read, grass fed beef tends to win in the depth and purity of flavor; grain finished beef tends to win in marbling, tenderness, and succulence. And there are hybrid approaches that fall somewhere in the middle. Is it always true that grass fed beef is leaner? Is it possible to raise beef entirely on grass and hay and develop marbling that would earn a USDA prime grade? And if so, is anyone doing this? And can I get some in NYC??

So I just took a close look at the d'artagnan recipe. I'm not so impressed by it. The only reason I can imagine you'd poach in stock made by diluting their duck demiglace is if you feel compelled to hand d'artagnan unnecessary amounts of money. A court bouillon is the traditional poaching liquid. It can be tailored to add any subtle seasoning you like. I don't know why you'd choose duck, unless you're a closeted turducken fetishist. I'm also not crazy about the two day process. I would want a hot bird going into the oven, so I'm not depending on the radiant heat warming a big bird all the way through (I don't even know how it's possible to do in 30 minutes). And I don't like the idea of a poached bird cooling at room temp for 4 hours and then being refrigerated. Most likely any colonies of bad things that form would get killed off in the oven, but the outer parts of that bird will spend a long time ... well over two hours ... in the breeding zone, and then won't be cooked at all again for another 12 hours or so. The one detail I like is basting with goose fat. I use butter, but I'll bet goose is a nice touch. My recipe is here. It includes suggestions for stuffing and a pan sauce, which can be freely interpreted. It started as George Perrier's recipe and evolved over the years as I learned more about food science and roasting.